their several moral territories, it is not easy to
imagine, especially if they all insisted upon independent sovereignty.
There must have been some danger, surely, of their disputing with one
another concerning the importance of their respective professions,
like the poor bourgeois gentilhomme's dancing-master, music-master,
master of morality, and master of philosophy, who all fell to blows to
settle their pretensions, forgetful of the presence of their pupil.
Masters, who are only expected to teach one thing, may be sincerely
anxious for the improvement of their pupils in that particular,
without being in the least interested for their general character or
happiness. Thus the drawing-master has done his part, and is satisfied
if he teaches his pupil to draw well: it is no concern of his what her
temper may be, any more than what sort of hand she writes, or how she
dances. The dancing-master, in his turn, is wholly indifferent about
the young lady's progress in drawing; all he undertakes, is to teach
her to dance.

We mention these circumstances to show parents, that masters, even
when they do the utmost that they engage to do, cannot educate their
children; they can only partially instruct them in particular arts.
Parents must themselves preside over the education of their children,
or must entirely give them into the care of some person of an enlarged
and philosophic mind, who can supply all the deficiencies of common
masters, and who can take advantage of all the positive good that can
be obtained from existing institutions. Such a preceptor or governess
must possess extensive knowledge, and that superiority of mind which
sees the just proportion and value of every acquisition, which is not
to be overawed by authority, or dazzled by fashion. Under the eye of
such persons, masters will keep precisely their proper places; they
will teach all they can teach, without instilling absurd prejudices,
or inspiring a spirit of vain rivalship; nor will masters be suffered
to continue their lessons when they have nothing more to teach.

Parents who do not think that they have leisure, or feel that they
have capacity, to take the entire direction of their children's
education upon themselves, will trust this important office to a
governess. The inquiry concerning the value of female accomplishments,
has been purposely entered into before we could speak of the choice of
a governess, because the estimation in which these are held, will very
much determine parents in their choice.

If what has been said of the probability of a decline in the public
taste for what are usually called accomplishments; of their little
utility to the happiness of families and individuals; of the waste of
time, and waste of the higher powers of the mind in acquiring them: if
what has been observed on any of these points is allowed to be just,
we shall have little difficulty in pursuing the same principles
further. In the choice of a governess we should not, then, consider
her fashionable accomplishments as her best recommendations; these
will be only secondary objects. We shall examine with more anxiety,
whether she possess a sound, discriminating, and enlarged
understanding: whether her mind be free from prejudice; whether she
has steadiness of temper to pursue her own plans; and, above all,
whether she has that species of integrity which will justify a parent
in trusting a child to her care. We shall attend to her conversation,
and observe her manners, with scrupulous minuteness. Children are
_imitative animals_, and they are peculiarly disposed to imitate the
language, manners, and gestures, of those with whom they live, and to
whom they look up with admiration. In female education, too much care
cannot be taken to form all those habits in morals and in manners,
which are distinguishing characteristics of amiable women. These
habits must be acquired early, or they will never appear easy or
graceful; they will necessarily be formed by those who see none but
good models.

We have already pointed out the absolute necessity of union amongst
all those who are concerned in a child's education. A governess must
either rule, or obey, decidedly. If she do not agree with the child's
parents in opinion, she must either know how to convince them by
argument, or she must with strict integrity conform her practice to
their theories. There are few parents, who will choose to give up the
entire care of their children to any governess; therefore, there will
probably be some points in which a difference of opinion will arise. A
sensible woman will never submit to be treated, as governesses are in
some families, like the servant who was asked by his master what
business he had to think: nor will a woman of sense or temper insist
upon her opinions without producing her reasons. She will thus ensure
the respect and the confidence of enlightened parents.

It is surely the interest of parents to treat the person who educates
their children, with that perfect equality and kindness, which will
conciliate her affection, and which will at the same time preserve her
influence and authority over her pupils. And it is with pleasure we
observe, that the style of behaviour to governesses, in well bred
families, is much changed within these few years. A governess is no
longer treated as an upper servant, or as an intermediate being
between a servant and a gentlewoman: she is now treated as the friend
and companion of the family, and she must, consequently, have warm and
permanent interest in its prosperity: she becomes attached to her
pupils from gratitude to their parents, from sympathy, from
generosity, as well as from the strict sense of duty.

In fashionable life there is, however, some danger that parents should
go into extremes in their behaviour towards their governesses. Those
who disdain the idea of assuming superiority of rank and fortune, and
who desire to treat the person who educates their children as their
equal, act with perfect propriety; but if they make her their
companion in all their amusements, they go a step too far, and they
defeat their own purposes. If a governess attends the card-table, and
the assembly-room; if she is to visit, and be visited, what is to
become of her pupils in her absence? They must be left to the care of
servants. There are some ladies who will not accept of any invitation,
in which the governess of their children is not included. This may be
done from a good motive, but, surely, it is unreasonable; for the very
use of a governess is to supply the mother's place in her absence.
Cannot this be managed better? Cannot the mother and governess both
amuse themselves at different times? There would then be perfect
equality; the governess would be in the same society, and would be
treated with the same respect, without neglecting her duty. The reward
which is given to women of abilities, and of unblemished reputation,
who devote themselves to the superintendence of the education of young
ladies in the higher ranks of life, the daughters of our affluent
nobility, ought to be considerably greater than what it is at present:
it ought to be such as to excite women to cultivate their talents, and
their understandings, with a view to this profession. A profession we
call it, for it should be considered as such, as an honourable
profession, which a gentlewoman might follow without losing any degree
of the estimation in which she is held by what is called _the world_.
There is no employment, at present, by which a gentlewoman can
maintain herself, without losing something of that respect, something
of that rank in society, which neither female fortitude nor male
philosophy willingly foregoes. The liberal professions are open to men
of small fortunes; by presenting one similar resource to women, we
should give a strong motive for their moral and intellectual
improvement.

Nor does it seem probable, that they should make a disgraceful or
imprudent use of their increasing influence and liberty in this case,
because their previous education must previously prepare them
properly. The misfortune of women has usually been, to have power
trusted to them before they were educated to use it prudently. To say
that preceptresses in the higher ranks of life should be liberally
rewarded, is but a vague expression; something specific should be
mentioned, wherever general utility is the object. Let us observe,
that many of the first dignities of the church are bestowed, and
properly bestowed, upon men who have educated the highest ranks of our
nobility. Those who look with an evil eye upon these promotions, do
not fairly estimate the _national_ importance of education for the
rich and powerful. No provision can be made for women who direct the
education of the daughters of our nobility, any ways equivalent to the
provision made for preceptors by those who have influence in the
state. A pecuniary compensation is in the power of opulent families.
Three hundred a year, for twelve or fourteen years, the space of time
which a preceptress must probably employ in the education of a young
lady, would be a suitable compensation for her care. With this
provision she would be enabled, after her pupil's education was
completed, either to settle in her own family, or she would, in the
decline of life, be happily independent, secure from the temptation of
marrying for money. If a few munificent and enlightened individuals
set the example of liberally rewarding merit in this situation, many
young women will probably appear with talents and good qualities
suited to the views of the most sanguine parents. With good sense, and
literary tastes, a young woman might instruct herself during the first
years of her pupils childhood, and might gradually prepare herself
with all the necessary knowledge: according to the principles that
have